Yeah, my old 2600K can hit 5 with the stock fan so long as I'm not putting stress on all eight logical cores. Basically no video encoding and I'm good. I still back it down to 4.4 for most ordinary purposes, however.

Flatline wrote on Jun 12, 2013, 16:30:For once Pachter and I agree on something.

I don't agree with him for the same reasons, but I suspect the outcomes are the same regardless. It doesn't look like we're getting very many big AAA games this Christmas for the Vita, and that will probably be the final nail in the coffin for it in the West.

Which is a shame. It's very good hardware, and even a price cut on the damned memory cards would have been enough to drum up some excitement and spur on sales.

At the end of the day, it needs games. With Sony not really doing much themselves on it, they're not exactly spurring on confidence for third parties to do likewise. Hell, compare it to Nintendo's release diarrhea on the 3DS - one knows how to support a handheld, and the other doesn't.

I have a pretty transgressive sense of humor - all of them, if you find the right angle, can be funny. That being said, there's a time and a place for all of them - a public event being streamed live over the Internet? Not one of those times.

dj LiTh wrote on Jun 1, 2013, 16:25:So what i gathered, about 1-15% faster vs Ivy at the same clock although most cases about 8% is a safe assumption. Much lower idle, but suprisingly higher load output. Although unless your slamming a laptop at full usage its prolly going to be pretty great on battery life.

I just upgraded to a 2500k about a year ago and am quite happy with it OC'd to 4.7ghz, wont be upgrading anytime soon, but for anyone before sandy this is probably a good time to jump in and get a K sku overclockable haswell chip.

Yeah, I've had a 2600K that I've had OC'd anywhere between 4.4 and 5.0 (the latter for four-thread use, the former for eight-thread use), and not really seeing any reason to upgrade anytime soon. For the cost of a new processor and motherboard I could snag a GeForce GTX 770, which would do significantly more for me in terms of an upgrade (I currently run a 560Ti) than getting a i7-4770K would.

Cpmartins wrote on May 31, 2013, 20:54:A thousand pages. If that doesn't tell you something about the kind of content they packed in the game, nothing will.

I still have my guidebooks for Daggerfall... it's in the same category of length all told, but basically just walls and walls of text, tables, and formulas (yes, the guides for it actually gave you the exact computations various spells or abilities relied on).

Rattlehead wrote on May 31, 2013, 22:26:Yea there is no way they will charge that much for game, it's obviously a placeholder, and knowing amazon's eagerness to sell anything before it exists *cough DNF cough* it's not right.

Additionally, Amazon charges you the lowest price between when you preorder and when it releases... from their perspective, it's better to err on the high side than lose your shirt assuming a price point that turns out to be lower than the official price.

PropheT wrote on May 30, 2013, 00:42:As an aside, it's odd that Forbes has become one of the more readable gaming news sites out there in the past year. Even their articles I don't like are generally better than the average stuff on actual gaming sites right now.

Not at all. In fact I find it odd that more mainstream sites don't take gaming seriously as it's been kicking the crap out of other mainstream entertainment for a long time now.

In the UK, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph also do some halfway-decent gaming-related journalism.

Alamar wrote on May 29, 2013, 13:52:I know! Can't you just image how stupid a company would be to turn down a huge profit...

Sometimes, thinking an issue through helps : )

-Alamar

A huge profit from a company that

A) You are 100% in direct competition with in the main market for which said product is used (ie, smartphones.)B) has consistently tried to not just sue you for paying licensing fees, but literally sue you OUT OF BUSINESS.

Yeah, you should JUMP at the opportunity to sell a billion dollars' worth of product to said company, especially since if you didn't, you could severely hamper your number one competitor in the smartphone business.

Creston

Simple solution - in lieu of licensing fees to Apple on Samsung hardware for Apple's IP, Samsung extends the former procurement arrangement Apple had with them. Everybody wins.

PHJF wrote on May 23, 2013, 21:37:The cost makes no sense for anyone. I'm sorry, but inflation hasn't gone up thirty fucking percent in the past year. What's a 760 going to cost, a mere $400?

The problem is that the GK110 GPU that comprises the 780 is just a die-disabled version of the GPU in Titan, which is a 7.1 billion transistor behemoth. In comparison, the 680's GPU is 3.5 billion transistors (on the same 28nm process!), and the 580's is 3 billion.

eRe4s3r wrote on May 23, 2013, 16:54:30% faster than a 670GTX But with 600€ price point 300€ more expensive.. haha Not going to be a huge success I'd wager...

670GTX is still the card to own, no reason to upgrade it seems...

The 780 is basically an upgrade path for people who currently are running a 480 or 580... the cost makes no sense for 680 owners.

I'm still wanting to see some GPU video transcoding benchmarks - I don't play as many newer games on my PC, but improvement in that area would be one facet where I'd be tempted to retire my 560Ti somewhere down the road.

Cook: We dont want to pay taxes we already paid in the various countries where we do business. We will bring back the money into the US once you drop the corporate tax rate from 12% to a more reasonable 1 or 2%.

Most of the Senators: 'Clapping', Bravo!, Long live Apple, this is the way the american dream is realized! etc...

Top corporate tax rate in the US is 35%, which would apply to every single dollar Apple repatriated. The 12% number you cited is an effective tax rate, which includes exempt income (profits from overseas) and various deductions and tax credits.

Technically, it could be argued that the ideal corporate tax rate should be zero, since all corporate profits that aren't put back into the business are either taxed as personal income (if distributed as bonuses to employees) or capital gains (if they are distributed to shareholders and/or employees as dividends). That being said, it doesn't particularly strike most people as "fair", and the innate anti-corporate animus of the average American voter would basically ensure such a system would never be put in place.